• From: Wayne Steele <xmlmaster@h...>
• To: mrc@a..., msf@m...
• Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 19:55:06 -0800

Whereas most legacy HTML browsers can handle XML documents to some minimal 
degree, I heard there was some old version of Netscape that _totally_ barfed 
when it encountered PIs.

Also, Netscape has (or had, I'm not sure) a lot of pull in the XML WGs (ask 
Tim Bray).

That's the rumour I heard, anyway.

-Wayne Steele


>From: Marcus Carr <mrc@a...>
>To: Michael Fuller <msf@m...>
>CC: xml-dev@l...
>Subject: Re:  Re: determining ID-ness in XML
>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 16:35:56 +1100
>
>
>Michael Fuller wrote:
>
> > No; but then I never understood why the use of processing instructions
> > had become infra dig. W3C politics, I hear whispered. Anyone care to 
>share?
>
>My totally uninformed guess is because in SGML, every application felt (and 
>was)
>free to use them any way they wanted. They didn't contain information 
>specified by
>the standard, they contained any kind of information that the application 
>might use.
>
>This doesn't seem to happen with XML applications - if it did, I would be 
>against
>their use as well, as the data produced becomes proprietary. I do think 
>that they
>are appropriate vehicles for well defined information related to the
>recommendations.
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
• Next by Date: Re: When to Validate XML?
• Previous by thread: ID-ness is not the same as type (Re: Re: determining ID-nessin XML)
• Next by thread: RE: Re: determining ID-ness in XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread